David Allenhttp://www.desmogblog.com/taxonomy/term/13786/all
enFlaws in Environmental Defense Fund's Methane Study Draw Criticism from Scientistshttp://www.desmogblog.com/2013/10/14/flaws-university-texas-methane-study-draw-criticism-scientists
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/flaring2.jpg?itok=PSH2429p" width="200" height="300" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Perhaps the single most consequential and controversial issue at the center of the onshore natural gas drilling boom is the question of methane leaks. Natural gas is primarily made of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, and if enough escapes into the atmosphere, these leaks could potentially make natural gas a worse fuel for the climate than coal.</p>
<p>In mid-September, researchers from the University of Texas <a href="http://www.engr.utexas.edu/news/releases/methanestudy">published</a> a study that was <a href="http://energyindepth.org/national/bombshell-study-confirms-low-methane-leakage-from-shale-gas/">hailed</a> by a triumphant oil and gas industry, which claimed it definitively showed that methane leaks from fracking are minimal. Major news outlets largely <a href="http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/16/encouraging-results-in-first-nationwide-look-at-gas-leaks-from-fracking-boom/?_r=0">fed this excitement</a>, proclaiming that the study showed <span class="caps">EPA</span> had dramatically overestimated methane leaks from the drilling boom.</p>
<p>But as the celebrations died down and more sober and rigorous analysis of the study has begun, scientists are finding that the University of Texas study is <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/168661042/PSE-Study-on-EDF-Greenwashing-of-Methane">riddled with flaws</a>.</p>
<p>The backers of the report cherry-picked the oil and gas wells included in the study, selecting smaller wells that had less capacity to leak and ones that used <a href="http://www.statejournal.com/story/17526063/epa-requires-green-completion-cuts-pollution-from-fracked-wells">leak controls</a> that are not currently used at many of the nation’s wells. The authors systematically ignored more recent federal research indicating that as much as <a href="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=solving-the-case-of-californias-extra-machine">17 percent of natural gas</a> – more than 10 times the estimate indicated by the <span class="caps">UT</span> study – leaks from gas fields, and overlooked serious methodological flaws that were pointed out in similar studies dating back as far as 1996.</p>
<p>As scientists have raised these concerns, the Environmental Defense Fund, one backer of the study which was <a href="http://www.edf.org/climate/methane-studies/faq">90 percent funded</a> by the oil and gas industry, have tried to tamp down some of the media excitement surrounding the result and said that their research was misrepresented.<!--break--></p>
<p>For example, the Wall Street Journal headlined <a href="http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887323981304579079400039800412">its coverage</a> of the report: “<span class="caps">U.S.</span> Overstates Leaks by Gas-Drillers, Says Study.” But some at <span class="caps">EDF</span> have said The Journal got it flat wrong.</p>
<p><span class="dquo">“</span>No. The <span class="caps">WSJ</span> headline is not an accurate reflection of what the study found,” wrote <span class="caps">EDF</span>’s Sam Parry in an <a href="http://grist.org/climate-energy/edf-defends-its-controversial-study-of-methane-leaks-from-fracking-wells/">online discussion</a>. “What the study found was that when you use <a href="http://watchlist.vermontlaw.edu/fracking-and-%E2%80%98green-completion%E2%80%99-still-incomplete/">green completion technologies</a>, you can mitigate the problem of methane leakage. If you don't use these technologies, the problem is real and very serious.”</p>
<p>Despite Mr. Parry’s allegation, no retractions or corrections have yet been made to the mainstream press coverage of the study.</p>
<p><span class="caps">EDF</span>’s complaints that the study was misreported are finding limited sympathy from some in the research community, who say that <span class="caps">EDF</span> officials have allowed their study to be <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2013/09/19/the-media-and-the-utedf-methane-study-job-well-done/">misrepresented</a> in the public eye by failing to mount an effective response to counter the inaccurate press coverage. <span class="caps">EDF</span>, they say, actually made things worse by <a href="http://www.edf.org/media/first-academic-study-released-edf%E2%80%99s-groundbreaking-methane-emissions-series">promising</a> that their <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/08/13/edf-greenwashing-fracking-climate-impact">16-part research series</a>, of which the <span class="caps">UT</span> study is the first, would provide the exclusive and definitive answer on methane leaks.</p>
<p>“It is very bad form to allege that the contributions of others are mere ‘snapshots’, and then offer up a very few snapshots of your own as somehow ‘definitive,’” said Prof. Anthony Ingraffea, one of the foremost experts on methane and climate change, and co-author of a <a href="http://www.momscleanairforce.org/files/2013/06/Howarthetal2012_Final.pdf">seminal paper</a> that first called into question the claimed climate benefits of natural gas. “It is for other stakeholders to judge the value of this research project, not the scientists and engineers performing it.”</p>
<p>The University of Texas study’s many flaws have cast <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/10/06/ny-times-joe-nocera-overlooks-flaws-edf-fracking-climate-change-study">further doubt</a> on the claim that <span class="caps">EDF</span>’s series will provide a definitive – or even reliable – assessment of natural gas’s climate impacts.</p>
<p>The stakes are enormous. Over the next two decades, the greenhouse effect from methane that leaks today will be <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/10/02/2708911/fracking-ipcc-methane/">up to 86 times</a> as powerful as today’s carbon dioxide emissions. The single <a href="http://www.eeb.cornell.edu/howarth/Howarth%20et%20al.%20--%20National%20Climate%20Assessment.pdf">largest source</a> of methane emissions in America is the natural gas industry – and right now that industry is experiencing a gold rush that has created a vast new network of wells, pipelines, and storage facilities across the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> – all holding methane, the main ingredient in natural gas.</p>
<p>If natural gas leaks at more than <a href="http://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise/energy/fossil-fuels/how-significant-is-methane-leakage">3.2 percent overall</a>, any climate change benefit gained by switching away from coal for electricity generation and burning natural gas instead will be lost, although that critical threshold may soon be lowered, as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/10370306/UK-fracking-ambitions-threatened-by-EU-warning-over-methane-emissions.html">recently concluded</a> that methane is even more potent than previously believed.</p>
<p>The <span class="caps">UT</span> study had a single narrow aim: to measure the amount of methane that leaked during certain stages of drilling and fracking a natural gas well.</p>
<p>A team of researchers descended upon 190 oil and gas wells owned by 9 major oil and gas companies, <a href="http://www.edf.org/climate/methane-studies/faq">studying</a> 27 hydraulic fracturing events and several other parts of the completion process. They used this data to estimate that on average, 0.42 percent of natural gas from a gas well could be expected to leak out at the well pad during a stage called “completing” the well. That’s consistent with <span class="caps">EPA</span>’s current official but controversial estimate that 1.5 percent of natural gas leaks overall, after accounting for leaks from places like pipelines (the agency’s own <a href="http://www.law360.com/articles/447700/epa-watchdog-to-probe-methane-leak-reduction-policy">Inspector General</a> called for more data and a closer review of that figure).</p>
<p>Some of the earliest criticism of the <span class="caps">UT</span> study focused on a major internal contradiction within the study itself. The well sites were selected with substantial input from the oil and gas industry, which volunteered specific sites, and the vast majority of the wells studied used leak-control technology that has yet to be adopted at many, if not most, oil and gas wells, while others were wells that produced very little gas and consequently even serious leaks would produce relatively small emissions – specifically, the authors noted, those wells had the potential to emit only 0.55% as much as an average well.<br /><br />
Although the study’s authors acknowledged that their measurements were by no means representative of the average gas well nationwide, they nonetheless chose to use that skewed data to estimate gas leaks nationwide.</p>
<p>The methodology that <span class="caps">UT</span> chose for making that estimate also has drawn heavy fire from others in the research community. The study, and its principal investigator David Allen, chose to use the same method that <span class="caps">EPA</span> used in its 1996 <a href="http://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/ap42/ch14/related/methane.pdf">national inventory</a> of methane emissions – and came to a nearly identical conclusion.<br /><br />
That 1996 methodology has been widely criticized, in part because it leaves a large margin of error. And with so much on the line, a large margin of error can obscure vital information. At its high end, the <span class="caps">UT</span> estimate of 1157 Gigagrams is roughly 1.5 times its low-end estimate, 757 Gigagrams.</p>
<p>The 1996 methodology uses an unreliably small percentage of wells to make sweeping predictions, researchers have complained. Like the 1996 study, which tested 0.14 percent of wells nationwide, the <span class="caps">UT</span> study relied on a tiny sample set of 0.11% of wells nationwide – in other words, less than 500 out of a half million wells.</p>
<p>“This is a grossly inadequate sampling, given that the United States is now home to more than half a million active natural gas wells — and more and more every day; 25,000 new wells were drilled last year alone,” <a href="http://www.athensohiotoday.com/blogs/guest_columnists/industry-study-fatally-flawed/article_de44776f-4d1f-5c62-98a9-d4a975e3de01.html" style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">wrote</a> <span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Dr. Alison Stine, a research fellow at Ohio University</span><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">.</span></p>
<p>As in the 1996 study, key uncertainties were left unaccounted for. The <span class="caps">UT</span> authors wrote that they simply ignored uncertainties surrounding “national counts of wells or equipment and the issue of whether the companies that provided sampling sites are representative of the national population.”</p>
<p><span class="dquo">“</span>Unfortunately, these are exactly the most important parameters on which to base a truly representative, nation-wide assessment,” Physicians Scientists <span class="amp">&amp;</span> Engineers for Healthy Energy wrote in their <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/168661042/PSE-Study-on-EDF-Greenwashing-of-Methane">assessment</a> of the <span class="caps">UT</span> research.<br /><br />
The wells tested by <span class="caps">UT</span> belonged to major oil and gas companies like Shell and Chevron – and those same companies have long argued that they have a better environmental track record than the little guys.</p>
<p>In addition, the <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2013/09/10/1304880110.full.pdf?with-ds=yes"><span class="caps">UT</span> study</a> leaves out key information, researchers charge. The paper itself does not even indicate what type of formation was being drilled at each site – meaning that it’s not clear whether these wells are shale gas wells, which have been at the heart of the onshore drilling boom, or other types of fracked wells, like coal bed methane or tight sand – and industry data shows that there can be a 10-fold difference between the varying types of wells.</p>
<p>Most importantly, the <span class="caps">UT</span> research completely ignores conflicting estimates in peer-reviewed literature. A string of studies have found vastly higher leaks than <span class="caps">UT</span>’s estimated 0.42 percent leak rate would support. Field testing by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reported cumulative leaks as high as <a href="http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2013/08/05/cires-and-noaa-scientists-observe-significant-methane-leaks-utah-natural">12 percent</a> of production in Colorado and <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/08/13/edf-greenwashing-fracking-climate-impact">17 percent</a> in the Los Angeles basin.<br /><br />
No effort to address these findings or to explain the discrepancy between the differing estimates was made by the <span class="caps">UT</span> researchers.</p>
<p><span class="dquo">“</span>It is disappointing that Allen and colleagues seem to have failed to employ basic scientific rules including transparent criteria for the selection of study sites to measure, sufficient sample sizes, and the attempt to place their results in the context of other scientific studies to date,” said Seth B. Shonkoff, Executive Director of Physicians Scientists <span class="amp">&amp;</span> Engineers for Healthy Energy.<br /><br />
“This study falls short in its attempt to help answer questions about methane emissions from modern gas development beyond the small number of gas industry-selected wells where measures were taken.”</p>
<p>For its part, <span class="caps">EDF</span> has argued that the study does not prove that only small amounts of natural gas are currently leaking, especially because the wells studied nearly all used the leak control technology, called “green completions,” saying that the study <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/17/us/gas-leaks-in-fracking-less-than-estimated.html">merely shows</a> the industry can control 99 percent of methane emissions during the completion stage – not that it does control them.<br /><br />
They argue that many wells will be required to adopt the technique in 2015 when new regulations go into effect, and so understanding its effectiveness is important.</p>
<p>Others have said that something doesn’t add up about the fact that the 1996 study and the <span class="caps">UT</span> study happen to reach nearly identical conclusions – despite intervening research that shows the true number is likely much higher and the fact that there was no large-scale shale gas development in 1996. They charge that the coincidence could be because both suffer from the same flaws.</p>
<p>“To allege that emissions have not changed since 1996 is absurd for at least two reasons,” said Prof. Ingraffea.<br /><br />
“<span class="caps">EDF</span> and industry cannot say, as they are now boasting, that new technologies have led to reduced emissions and then say they are the same now as in 1996; and there was no large scale commercial shale gas development in 1996, and the present issue and their study is all about shale gas development.”</p>
<p><span style="font-size:8px;">Photo credit: <a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-102913718/stock-photo-detail-of-an-oil-refinery-plant.html?src=o1yKw_852UqbxSpolGaIHw-2-10">Detail of an oil-refinery plant</a>, via Shutterstock.</span></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/3066">environmental defense fund</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8983">EDF</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1907">methane</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2800">natural gas</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1976">emissions</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14012">leaks climate change</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13786">David Allen</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9731">University of Texas</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14013">methane study</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5133">fracking</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/939">climate change</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5137">hydraulic fracturing</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6010">Anthony Ingraffea</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/913">global warming</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14014">coal versus natural gas</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1268">shell</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/chevron">chevron</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14015">Wall St. Journal</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14016">correction</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14017">retraction</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14018">flaws</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14019">cherry-picking</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/noaa">NOAA</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/758">National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/epa">EPA</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14020">Environemental Protection Agency</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14021">federal data</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14022">estimates</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14023">methodology</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14024">1996</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5156">oil and gas industry</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9835">Shale Gas Industry</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14025">Sam Parry</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14026">EDF methane research series</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14027">margin of error</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13857">uncertainty</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14028">uncertainties</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14029">unreliable</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14030">criticized</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14031">critiqued</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14032">oil and gas majors</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14033">peer-reviewed</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14034">literature</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14035">conflicts</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9024">Physicians Scientists &amp; Engineers for Healthy Energy</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14036">Seth B. Shonkoff</a></div></div></div>Mon, 14 Oct 2013 12:00:00 +0000Sharon Kelly7546 at http://www.desmogblog.comNY Times' Joe Nocera Overlooks Key Flaws in EDF Fracking Climate Change Studyhttp://www.desmogblog.com/2013/10/06/ny-times-joe-nocera-overlooks-flaws-edf-fracking-climate-change-study
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/Joe%20Nocera%20.jpg?itok=FRz4oFLv" width="200" height="176" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Yesterday,<em> New York Times</em>' columnist <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/joenocera/index.html">Joe Nocera</a> weighed in on the study by <a href="http://desmogblog.com/2013/09/16/frackademia-people-money-behind-edf-fracking-methane-emissions-study" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; color: rgb(255, 205, 51); text-decoration: none; ">Environmental Defense Fund (<span class="caps">EDF</span>) and University of Texas-Austin (<span class="caps">UT</span>-Austin)</a> on the climate change impacts of <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/fracking-the-future/" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; color: rgb(51, 153, 204); text-decoration: none; ">hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”)</a>. <em style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; ">DeSmogBlog</em> got a special mention in Nocera's op-ed titled, “<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/05/opinion/a-fracking-rorschach-test.html?_r=0">A Fracking Rorschach Test</a>.” </p>
<p>Nocera praised <a href="http://www.che.utexas.edu/faculty-staff/faculty-directory/david-t-allen-phd/"><span class="caps">UT</span>-Austin Professor David Allen</a> and colleagues for obtaining what he claimed was “<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/05/opinion/a-fracking-rorschach-test.html?_r=0">unassailable data</a>” on fugitive methane emissions and fracking's climate change impact potential. </p>
<p>“The reason the Environmental Defense Fund wanted this study done is precisely so that unassailable data, rather than mere estimates, could become part of the debate over fracking,” <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/05/opinion/a-fracking-rorschach-test.html?_r=0">wrote Nocera</a>. “You can’t have sound regulation without good data.”</p>
<p>Missing from Nocera's praise: new findings by the Intergovernment Panel on Climate Change in their latest comprehensive review of the climate crisis.</p>
<p><span class="caps">IPCC</span> revealed “over a 20-year time frame, methane has a global warming potential 86 [times the amount of] <span class="caps">CO</span>2, up from its previous estimate of 72 [times],” <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/10/02/2708911/fracking-ipcc-methane/">as explained by <em>Climate Progress</em>' Joe Romm</a>.</p>
<p>In juxtaposition, Nocera dismissed <em>DeSmog</em>'s criticisms of the study - one we referred to as “<a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/10232">frackademia</a>.” </p>
<p>Simplifying the crux of my <a href="http://desmogblog.com/2013/09/16/frackademia-people-money-behind-edf-fracking-methane-emissions-study">3,000-word <em>DeSmog </em>critique</a> and the <a href="http://desmogblog.com/2013/09/18/big-oil-pr-pros-lobbyists-edf-fracking-climate-study-steering-committee">800-word follow-up</a> as “because the nine companies involved had both cooperated and helped pay for it,” <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/05/opinion/a-fracking-rorschach-test.html?_r=0">Nocera then rhetorically asks</a> “why a study that necessitated industry cooperation and money is inherently less valid than a study produced by scientists who are openly opposed to fracking was left unanswered.”</p>
<p><!--break--></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">The answer: the scientists “openly opposed to fracking” whom he points to, Cornell University's Robert Howarth and Anthony Ingraffea - authors of the first major academic </span><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/cornell-fracking-shale-gas-more-dangerous-than-coal-climate" style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">study documenting fracking's climate change impacts published in April 2011</a><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> - are not the only ones who have pointed to fracking's climate change perils. </span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Further, </span><em style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">DeSmog's</em><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> critiques of the <span class="caps">EDF</span>/<span class="caps">UT</span>-Austin study run far deeper than oil industry funding and conflicts of interest alone.</span></p>
<h3>
<span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Recent Study: “Alarming High,” Findings Sans Industry Collaboration</span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> </span></h3>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 1.5em;">Nocera - a <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/05/opinion/a-fracking-rorschach-test.html?_r=0">self-described fracking supporter</a> - overlooked a <a href="ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/hats/papers/montzka/2012_pubs/in%20review_Karion%20et%20al%202012.pdf">key study published in early August</a> by 19 researchers primarily from </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 1.5em;">National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (<span class="caps">NOAA</span>)</span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/08/07/2426441/methane-leakage-gas-fields/"> and the University of Colorado</a>.</span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Key differences between the <span class="caps">EDF</span>-Austin study and the <span class="caps">NOAA</span>-Colorado study exist not only in the methodologies and the </span><a href="http://desmogblog.com/2013/09/18/big-oil-pr-pros-lobbyists-edf-fracking-climate-study-steering-committee" style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">people</a><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> and </span><a href="http://desmogblog.com/2013/09/16/frackademia-people-money-behind-edf-fracking-methane-emissions-study" style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">money</a><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> behind the studies, but also in the accompanying results.</span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><img alt="" src="http://desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Oil%20and%20Gas%20Wells%20in%20Unitah%20Basin.jpg" style="width: 450px; height: 417px;" /></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:8px;">Uintah Basin Gas Wells; Image Credit: <a href="http://cires.colorado.edu/news/press/2013/methaneleaks.html"><em>Google Earth</em></a></span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">“The team determined that methane emissions from the oil and natural gas fields in Uintah County totaled about 55,000 kg (more than 120,000 lbs) an hour on the day of the flight,” a <a href="http://cires.colorado.edu/news/press/2013/methaneleaks.html#sthash.K3GRCYey.dpuf">press release on the <span class="caps">NOAA</span>-University of Colorado study explained</a>. “That emission rate is about 6 to 12 percent of the average hourly natural gas production in Uintah County during the month of February.” </span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><img alt="" src="http://desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/NOAA%3AUniversity%20of%20Colorado%20Study.jpg" style="width: 450px; height: 300px;" /></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:8px;">Unitah Basin fly-over; Photo Credit: <a href="http://cires.colorado.edu/news/press/2013/methaneleaks.html"><span class="caps">NOAA</span>/University of Colorado</a></span></p>
<p><span class="caps">EDF</span>/<span class="caps">UT</span>-Austin found fugitive methane emissions rates at a scant .42-percent, far lower than the <span class="caps">NOAA</span>/University of Colorado study and 2-4% lower than the Cornell University study.</p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Like the <span class="caps">EDF</span>/<span class="caps">UT</span>-Austin study, the </span><a href="ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/hats/papers/montzka/2012_pubs/in%20review_Karion%20et%20al%202012.pdf" style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">researchers did receive industry funding</a><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> from the </span><a href="http://www.westernenergyalliance.org/alliance/our-members" style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">industry-funded Western Energy Alliance</a><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">. Unlike the <span class="caps">EDF</span>/<span class="caps">UT</span>-Austin study, the samples taken did not require industry compliance because the researchers took them via <a href="http://fuelfix.com/blog/2013/08/06/study-finds-alarmingly-high-methane-leakage-from-utah-wells/">11 fly-overs of well production sites</a>.</span></p>
<p>When the <span class="caps">NOAA</span>-Colorado study was released, <span class="caps">EDF</span> called the results “<a href="http://blogs.edf.org/energyexchange/2013/08/05/new-warnings-about-methane-emissions/">alarmingly high</a>.”</p>
<h3>
<span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Green Completions vs. Representative Sample: No “Super Emitters” Included</span></h3>
<p>While the <span class="caps">NOAA</span>/University of Colorado study analyzed samples across an entire shale gas basin in Utah, the <a href="http://www.utexas.edu/news/2013/09/16/understanding-methane-emissions/"><span class="caps">EDF</span>/<span class="caps">UT</span>-Austin study honed in on well completion sites</a> that the industry calls “green completions.” The <span class="caps">U.S.</span> Environmental Protection Agency <a href="http://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=117050">will not mandate these completions until 2015</a>, so they are not representative of the industry's performance at the moment. </p>
<p>“In the past, a well's initial production was typically vented or burned off to allow impurities to clear before the well was tied into a pipeline,” <a href="http://articles.philly.com/2012-11-26/business/35348948_1_natural-gas-shale-gas-marcellus-shale">explained <em>The Philidelphia Inquirer</em></a>. </p>
<p>“Now, more operators are employing reduced-emission completions - a 'green completion; - a process in which impurities such as sand, drilling debris, and fluids from hydraulic fracturing are filtered out and the gas is sold, not wasted.”</p>
<p>Thus, while important measurements, the <span class="caps">EDF</span>/<span class="caps">UT</span>-Austin study - hailed as “<a href="http://www.utexas.edu/news/2013/09/16/understanding-methane-emissions/">unprecedented measurements</a>” in a <span class="caps">UT</span>-Austin press release - <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/09/19/2646881/study-fracked-wells-methane-emissions-super-emitters/">neglected to measure any of the “super emitters,”</a> <span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">as </span><em style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Climate Progress</em><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">' Joe Romm pointed out.</span></p>
<p>“The 0.42 percent is the average of a bunch of good actors but not necessarily representative of the real world,” explained <a href="http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/aircraft/personnel/sweeney.html"><span class="caps">NOAA</span>'s Colm Sweeney</a>, one of the Unitah Basin study co-authors, in an <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/09/19/2646881/study-fracked-wells-methane-emissions-super-emitters/">interview with <em>EnergyWire</em></a>. “The super-emitters are lost in a study released this week by scientists at the University of Texas, Austin, and the Environmental Defense Fund.”</p>
<p><img alt="" src="http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/aircraft/personnel/sweeney.jpg" style="width: 350px; height: 328px;" /></p>
<p><span style="font-size:8px;">Colm Sweeney; Photo Credit: <a href="http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/aircraft/personnel/sweeney.html"><em><span class="caps">NOAA</span></em></a></span></p>
<p>In Howarth's original critiques of the study cited here on <em>DeSmog</em>, he echoed Sweeney. </p>
<p>“First, this study is based only on evaluation of sites and times chosen by industry,” <a href="http://desmogblog.com/2013/09/16/frackademia-people-money-behind-edf-fracking-methane-emissions-study">wrote Howarth</a>. </p>
<p>“The Environmental Defense Fund over the past year has repeatedly stated that only by working with industry could they and the Allen et al. team have access necessary to make their measurements. So this study must be viewed as a best-case scenario.”</p>
<p>Robert F. Kennedy Jr. - <a href="http://www.riverkeeper.org/about-us/our-team/robert-f-kennedy-jr/">Chief Prosecuting Attorney for the Waterkeeper Alliance</a> and a <a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/rkennedy/">Senior Attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council</a> - sang a similar chorus about the study in a recent interview with National Public Radio's “Stateimpact Pennsylvania.”</p>
<p><img alt="" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2d/Robert_Kennedy_Jr._speech_1.jpg" style="width: 350px; height: 233px;" /></p>
<p><span style="font-size:8px;">Photo Credit: <a href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Dschwen">Daniel Schwen</a> | <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Robert_Kennedy_Jr._speech_1.jpg"><em>Wikimedia Commons</em></a></span></p>
<p>”[<span class="caps">EDF</span>/Austin] studied wells that were experimenting with new technologies that are not industry-wide and not required for the industry to see if they could reduce methane rates, and indeed the rates were lower,” <a href="http://stateimpact.npr.org/pennsylvania/2013/10/03/robert-f-kennedy-jr-calls-natural-gas-a-catastrophe">Kennedy stated</a>.</p>
<h3>
Did Fracking Industry 'Partners' Guide <span class="caps">EDF</span>'s Flawed Methodology?</h3>
<p>Unexplored by Nocera - and still unanswered by journalists and researchers: whether the <a href="http://desmogblog.com/2013/09/16/frackademia-people-money-behind-edf-fracking-methane-emissions-study">people and money behind the <span class="caps">EDF</span>/<span class="caps">UT</span>-Austin study</a> and <a href="http://desmogblog.com/2013/09/18/big-oil-pr-pros-lobbyists-edf-fracking-climate-study-steering-committee">Steering Committee</a> pushed the study in a direction that would produce industry-friendly results.</p>
<p><em style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">DeSmogBlog</em><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> has filed a <span class="caps">FOIA</span> request with <span class="caps">UT</span>-Austin to find out what type of industry influence existed for the <span class="caps">EDF</span>/<span class="caps">UT</span>-Austin study, requesting all communications between the industry-stacked Steering Committee and <span class="caps">UT</span>-Austin faculty and staff. </span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Yet, the biggest takeaway from the <span class="caps">EDF</span>/<span class="caps">UT</span>-Austin study - despite efforts by <a href="http://energyindepth.org/national/bombshell-study-confirms-low-methane-leakage-from-shale-gas/">industry front groups</a> and <a href="http://marcelluscoalition.org/2013/09/groundbreaking-methane-emissions-study-reconfirms-environmental-benefits-safety-of-shale-gas/">lobbyists</a> to assert it as definitive - is that fracking is proceeding at breakneck speed regardless of the still unknown and daunting scope of all the threats that unconventional oil and gas drilling poses to human health, ecosystems and the climate.</span></p>
<h3 style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 1.3em; font-size: 1.4em; ">
Bottom Line: Too Many Unanswered Questions to Allow Reckless Fracking</h3>
<p>DeSmogBlog stands by the concluding recommendations in our 2011 report “<a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/fracking-the-future/desmog-fracking-the-future.pdf">Fracking the Future</a>,” and would like to know which aspects of this position are objectionable to Mr. Nocera and others who are promoting the <span class="caps">EDF</span>/Austin study: </p>
<ul><li>
A national moratorium on hydraulic fracturing for unconventional gas until independent scientific studies are conducted to verify that fracking is not responsible for adverse outcomes on drinking water, public health and the global climate.<br /> </li>
<li>
The federal government, not the states, should strictly oversee setting and enforcing standards for unconventional gas drilling. Federal oversight of the unconventional gas industry is critical, since the states have not demonstrated the capacity to hold drillers accountable for contamination of water supplies, growing air pollution problems and the potentially devastating climate change implications of fugitive methane and other emissions. Federal agencies should employ existing federal statutes that don’t currently apply to gas drilling, and review the need for any new standards necessary to protect public health and the environment.<br /> </li>
<li>
Greater scrutiny is needed on common drilling practices such as cementing procedures, wastewater handling and storage of harmful drilling chemicals.<br /> </li>
<li>
Congress and federal agency officials must immediately require mandatory industry reporting of lifecycle emissions of gas drilling operations to ensure relevant and reliable information is accessible to the public, especially independent experts.<br /> </li>
<li>
They must also require mandatory disclosure of fracking fluid chemicals, including the exact chemical recipes used in each operation.</li>
</ul><p><br />
As we concluded in our report, “uncertainties about the extent of methane emissions and leakage from drilling operations, storage tanks and pipelines carrying gas” remain a critical issue for scientists to assess. Without mandatory federal policy requiring industry disclosure of life-cycle methane leakage, we are all left in the dark about the true risks of the fracking boom.</p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; font-size: 8px; line-height: 1.5em;">Photo Credit: </span><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/52614599@N00" style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; font-size: 8px; line-height: 1.5em;">Doc Searls</a><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; font-size: 8px; line-height: 1.5em;"> | </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Joseph_Nocera_at_Berkman_Center.jpg" style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; font-size: 8px; line-height: 1.5em;"><em>Wikimedia Commons</em></a></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/12185">Joe Nocera</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13975">super emitters</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6308">Geophysical Research Letters</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2934">University of Colorado</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10232">Frackademia</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4876">Climate Progress</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13972">Green Completions</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8316">Western Energy Alliance</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13973">Unitah Basin</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/the-new-york-times">The New York Times</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5133">fracking</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8983">EDF</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/3066">environmental defense fund</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5137">hydraulic fracturing</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/939">climate change</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1907">methane</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1169">greenhouse gases</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1908">carbon dioxide</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4877">Joe Romm</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1044">Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5353">Robert F. Kennedy Jr.</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13786">David Allen</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/758">National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/noaa">NOAA</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/676">IPCC</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/834">intergovernmental panel on climate change</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6011">Robert Howarth</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7829">Bob Howarth</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7832">Tony Ingraffea</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13974">Colm Sweeney</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6010">Anthony Ingraffea</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2964">Cornell University</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6344">unconventional gas</a></div></div></div>Mon, 07 Oct 2013 04:16:58 +0000Steve Horn7533 at http://www.desmogblog.comBig Oil PR Pros, Lobbyists Dominate EDF Fracking Climate Study Steering Committeehttp://www.desmogblog.com/2013/09/18/big-oil-pr-pros-lobbyists-edf-fracking-climate-study-steering-committee
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/Steering%20off%20the%20Cliff.jpeg?itok=BFDCUITF" width="200" height="228" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Alongside releasing its <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2013/09/10/1304880110">controversial findings on fugitive methane emissions</a> caused by <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/fracking-the-future">hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”)</a> on September 16, University of Texas-Austin also unveiled an industry-stacked <a href="http://dept.ceer.utexas.edu/methane/study/steering.cfm">Steering Committee roster for the study</a> it conducted in concert with Environmental Defense Fund (<span class="caps">EDF</span>).</p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Stacked with former and current oil industry lobbyists, policy professionals and business executives, the Steering Committee is proof positive of the conflicts of interest evident in the roster of</span><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/09/16/frackademia-people-money-behind-edf-fracking-methane-emissions-study" style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> people and funding behind the “frackademia” study</a><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">.</span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Only two out of the 11 members of the Steering Committee besides lead author and </span><a href="http://www.che.utexas.edu/faculty-staff/faculty-directory/david-t-allen-phd/" style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><span class="caps">UT</span>-Austin Professor David Allen</a><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> have a science background relevant to onshore fracking. </span></p>
<p>That study found fugitive methane emissions at the well pad to be 2%-4% lower than discovered by the non-industry funded groundbreaking<a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/cornell-fracking-shale-gas-more-dangerous-than-coal-climate"> April 2011 Cornell University study</a> co-authored by Anthony Ingraffea and Robert Howarth.</p>
<p>The Cornell study concluded <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/emissions-from-shale-gas-worse-than-coal-2011-4">fracking is worse for the climate than coal</a> combustion when measured over its entire lifecycle. </p>
<p><em>Webster's Dictionary</em> <a href="http://www.thefreedictionary.com/steering+committee">defines a Steering Committee</a> as “a committee, especially of a deliberative or legislative body, that prepares the agenda of a session.”</p>
<p>In the case of the <span class="caps">EDF</span> study - based on the oddly rosy findings - it seems plausible the industry-stacked Committee drove the report in a direction beneficial to oil industry profits rather than science. </p>
<!--break-->
<h3>
Steering Committee: <span class="caps">PR</span> Pros, Lobbyists, Policy Wonks</h3>
<p>The following is a list of Steering Committee members working for Big Oil. </p>
<p>1.) <strong><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/tedwurfel">Ted Wurfel</a>, Health, Safety, Environment and Operational Integrity Manager for Talisman Energy</strong>: Wurfel is one of two Steering Committee members besides lead author Allen with a science degree relevant to onshore drilling, <span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">with an engineering academic background, according to <em>LinkedIn</em>.</span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><img alt="" src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Screen%20Shot%202013-09-17%20at%2010.10.27%20PM.png" style="width: 225px; height: 170px;" /></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:8px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Ted Wurfel; Photo Credit: </span><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/%20Ted%20Wurfel%20PA%20Lobbying%20Profile.pdf"><em><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Pennsylvania Lobbying Disclosure website</span></em></a></span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">He's also a <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/%20Ted%20Wurfel%20PA%20Lobbying%20Profile.pdf">registered lo</a></span><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/%20Ted%20Wurfel%20PA%20Lobbying%20Profile.pdf"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">bbyist in Pennsylvania</span></a><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> - </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">a state located in the heart of the </span><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/5401" style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Marcellus Shale</a><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> basin - and </span><a href="http://www.followthemoney.org/database/lobbyist.phtml?l=225223" style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">formerly lobbied for Chief Oil and Gas</a><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">. </span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">2.) </span><strong><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/pub/paul-krishna/11/329/281">Paul Krishna</a>, </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Manager of Environmental, Health <span class="amp">&amp;</span> Safety Issues at ExxonMobil/<span class="caps">XTO</span> Energy</span></strong><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">: Krishna is the other </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Steering Committee member with</span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> a science degree relevant to onshore drilling, with an undergraduate degree in g</span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">eology and a masters in geosciences. </span></p>
<p>3.) <strong><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/pub/david-mcbride/5/2a4/58">David McBride</a>, Vice President of Environmental and Human Services at Anadarko Petroleum</strong>: McBride earned a degree in Marine Biology before going to law school and pursuing his career in the oil industry.</p>
<p><img alt="" src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Screen%20Shot%202013-09-17%20at%207.29.24%20PM.png" style="width: 200px; height: 194px;" /></p>
<p><span style="font-size:8px;"> Photo Credit: <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/pub/david-mcbride/5/2a4/58"><em>LinkedIn</em></a></span></p>
<p>4.) <strong><a href="http://littlesis.org/person/129463/Jeffrey_Kupfer">Jeffrey Kupfer</a></strong> works as a non-registered lobbyist for Chevron - officially titled a “Senior Advisor for Government Affairs.” <a href="http://marcelluscoalition.org/about/executive-committee/" style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Kupfer sits on the Executive Board of the Marcellus Shale Coalition</a><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">, the industry's lobbying arm in Pennsylvania.</span></p>
<p><img alt="" src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Screen%20Shot%202013-09-17%20at%208.18.25%20PM.png" style="width: 225px; height: 289px;" /></p>
<p><span style="font-size:8px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Jeffrey Kupfer; Photo Credit: <a href="http://www.id.doe.gov/news/PressReleases/PR080904.htm"><em><span class="caps">U.S.</span> Department of Energy</em></a> </span></span></p>
<p>He sits on Pennsylvania Republican Gov. Tom Corbett's industry-stacked <a href="http://public-accountability.org/wp-content/uploads/Fracking-and-the-Revolving-Door-in-Pennsylvania.pdf">Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission</a> alongside one of the industry's first “frackademics,” <a href="http://littlesis.org/person/85558/Terry_Engelder">Terry Engelder of Penn State University</a>.</p>
<p>Kupfer also sits on <a href="http://www.mde.state.md.us/programs/Land/mining/marcellus/Pages/Commission.aspx">Maryland's Marcellus Shale Safe Drilling Initiative Advisory Commission</a>.</p>
<p>Prior to working for Chevron, Kupfer passed through the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Government-industry_revolving_door">government-industry revolving door</a> and <a href="http://www.cit.cmu.edu/alumni/speaker_series/09_15_2011/bios.html#kupfer">worked as Deputy <span class="caps">U.S.</span> Secretary of State</a> for President George W. Bush from 2006-2009 under former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. He also spent time as the <a href="http://www.heinz.cmu.edu/faculty-and-research/faculty-profiles/faculty-details/index.aspx?faculty_id=342">State Department's Chief Operating Officer</a> under Rice.</p>
<p>Chevron is one of the <a href="http://www.sustainableshale.org/strategic-partners/">dues-paying members of the Center for Sustainable Shale Development</a> - described as the “<a href="http://public-accountability.org/wp-content/uploads/big_green_fracking_machine.pdf">Big Green Fracking Machine</a>” by <em>Public Accountability Initiative</em> - alongside <span class="caps">EDF</span>.</p>
<p>5.) <strong><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/pub/dick-francis/13/185/149">Dick Francis</a></strong> serves as Manager of Regulatory Policy for Shell Oil, another <a href="http://www.sustainableshale.org/strategic-partners/">dues-paying member of the Center for Sustainable Shale Development</a>.</p>
<p>6.) <strong><a href="http://www.swn.com/aboutswn/pages/corporateofficers.aspx">James Bolander</a></strong> serves as Senior Vice President Resource Development for Southwestern Energy.</p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">7.) </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/pub/susan-spratlen/64/6a5/346"><strong>Susan Spratlen</strong></a> serves as head of Communications at Pioneer Resources and has an accounting undergraduate academic background.</span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">8.) <strong><a href="http://littlesis.org/person/118512/David_Keane">David Keane</a> </strong>is <span class="caps">BG</span> Group's </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Vice President of Policy and Corporate Affairs</span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> and has a business school academic background. </span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Keane <a href="http://www.legis.state.ak.us/basis/folioproxy.asp?url=http://www.legis.state.ak.us/cgi-bin/folioisa.dll/cm25/query=*/doc/%7Bt12934%7D/pageitems=%7Bbody%7D?">testified on behalf of the Alaska Gas Pipeline</a> (now known as the <a href="http://www.gasline.alaska.gov/newsroom/Presentations/SCLNG%20-%20HRES%20Lunch%20&amp;%20Learn%202.19.13.pdf">South Central <span class="caps">LNG</span> project</a>) - co-owned <a href="http://www.gasline.alaska.gov/newsroom/Presentations/SCLNG%20-%20HRES%20Lunch%20&amp;%20Learn%202.19.13.pdf">by Transcanada, ExxonMobil, <span class="caps">BP</span> and ConocoPhillips</a> - in front of the Alaska state legislature in February 2008. </span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">He also serves on the <a href="http://littlesis.org/person/118512/David_Keane">Board of Directors of </a></span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://littlesis.org/person/118512/David_Keane">Center for Liquefied Natural Gas</a>.</span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> </span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">9.) <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/pub/jill-e-cooper/5/627/89b"><strong>Jill Cooper</strong></a></span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> serves as </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Group Lead for the <span class="caps">US</span> Division of the Environment for Encana. Her academic background is in environmental law and she also has a masters in business.</span></p>
<h3>
<span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Steering Off the Climate Cliff?</span></h3>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><span class="caps">EDF</span>'s study has already won praise from the <em><a href="http://www.api.org/news-and-media/news/newsitems/2013/sept-2013/study-methane-emissions-from-natural-gas-production-are-lower-than-previously-estimated">American Petroleum Institute</a></em>, <a href="http://energyindepth.org/national/bombshell-study-confirms-low-methane-leakage-from-shale-gas/"><em>Energy in Depth</em></a>, <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/06/03/exposed-fracknation-deploys-tobacco-playbook-response-gasland-2">industry-funded</a> <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/05/28/fracknation-part-two-koch-industries-ties-bind">propaganda</a> film “<a href="https://twitter.com/FrackNation/status/380004574322384896">FrackNation</a>,” and the right-wing news website founded by Glenn Beck, <a href="http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/16/study-findings-alleviate-some-anti-fracking-fears/"><em>The Blaze</em></a>.</span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><em>Greenpeace <span class="caps">USA</span></em> Executive Director Phil Radford's worst case scenario has come true.</span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">“At worst, [the study] will be used as <span class="caps">PR</span> by the natural gas industry to promote their pollution,” <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/philip-radford/dont-let-the-industry-fra_b_3936456.html">Radford wrote soon after the study's release</a>. </span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">“In fact, <a href="http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2011/04/fracking-leaks-may-make-gas-dirtier-coal">methane is 105 times more powerful than carbon pollution</a> as a global warming pollutant [during its first 20 years in the atmosphere], so figuring out its real climate impacts has very real consequences for us going forward.”</span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">This raises the key question: could the Steering Committee's agenda steer us all off the climate cliff? </span></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8983">EDF</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13786">David Allen</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5762">talisman energy</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13793">Steerring Committee</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5401">Marcellus shale</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7545">BG Group</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9228">Public Accountability Initiative</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/encana">encana</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13150">South Central LNG</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13746">Center for Sustainable Shale Development</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13402">Southwestern Energy</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13794">Pioneer Resources</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/657">ExxonMobil</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/chevron">chevron</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/648">shell oil</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6647">Marcellus Shale Coalition</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7662">Anadarko Petroleum</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11517">XTO</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13795">Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13796">Frackdemia</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6040">Tom Corbett</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13797">Marcellus Shale Safe Drilling Initiative Advisory Commission</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/12027">Terry Engelder</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9731">University of Texas</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9732">UT-Austin</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13798">Center for Liquefied Natural Gas</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13799">Alaska Gas Pipeline</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/3066">environmental defense fund</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13781">Susan Spratlen</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2203">condoleezza rice</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/912">george w. bush</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13782">David McBride</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13783">Ted Wurfel</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5133">fracking</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5137">hydraulic fracturing</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1907">methane</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5565">shale gas</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7277">shale oil</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2964">Cornell University</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6010">Anthony Ingraffea</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6011">Robert Howarth</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7832">Tony Ingraffea</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7829">Bob Howarth</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7406">Phil Radford</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7407">Greenpeace USA</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13784">Jeffrey Kupfer</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13785">Jeff Kupfer</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/12833">Atlas Energy</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13787">Jim Bolander</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13788">Jill Cooper</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13789">Dick Francis</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13790">David Keane</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13791">Paul Krishna</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6344">unconventional gas</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8931">unconventional oil</a></div></div></div>Wed, 18 Sep 2013 12:00:00 +0000Steve Horn7475 at http://www.desmogblog.com